Interventions involving nudge theory for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Health Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1037/hea0001400
Jiarong Zhang, Hui Jin
{"title":"Interventions involving nudge theory for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jiarong Zhang, Hui Jin","doi":"10.1037/hea0001400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>New approaches to mitigate vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccine uptake are urgently needed. Nudging has shown effective results in several health areas. However, the effectiveness of interventions involving nudge theory in increasing COVID-19 vaccination remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials published before December 31, 2022, to determine whether interventions involving nudge theory improved COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intent. Risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as pooled measures to assess vaccination behavior. Intention to vaccinate was reported in a narrative synthesis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen randomized controlled trials involving 176,125 participants were included. Interventions involving nudge theory weakly boosted the COVID-19 vaccine uptake rate (RR = 1.21, 95% CI [1.07, 1.36], <i>p</i> < .01). Subgroup analysis showed a weak positive effect of social norms (RR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.61, 2.57]), defaults (RR = 1.32, 95% CI [1.03, 1.69]), and salient reminders (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.36]). Nudge interventions integrating multiple components were more efficacious in increasing vaccination rates compared to nudge alone. The effect of nudging interventions weakened over time (<i>p</i> < .001). Most studies (10 of 11) involving vaccination intention outcomes showed positive or partially positive results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interventions involving nudge theory can promote COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intentions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":55066,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: New approaches to mitigate vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccine uptake are urgently needed. Nudging has shown effective results in several health areas. However, the effectiveness of interventions involving nudge theory in increasing COVID-19 vaccination remains unclear.

Method: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials published before December 31, 2022, to determine whether interventions involving nudge theory improved COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intent. Risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as pooled measures to assess vaccination behavior. Intention to vaccinate was reported in a narrative synthesis.

Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials involving 176,125 participants were included. Interventions involving nudge theory weakly boosted the COVID-19 vaccine uptake rate (RR = 1.21, 95% CI [1.07, 1.36], p < .01). Subgroup analysis showed a weak positive effect of social norms (RR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.61, 2.57]), defaults (RR = 1.32, 95% CI [1.03, 1.69]), and salient reminders (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.36]). Nudge interventions integrating multiple components were more efficacious in increasing vaccination rates compared to nudge alone. The effect of nudging interventions weakened over time (p < .001). Most studies (10 of 11) involving vaccination intention outcomes showed positive or partially positive results.

Conclusions: Interventions involving nudge theory can promote COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intentions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用推力理论对 COVID-19 疫苗接种进行干预:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目标:亟需新的方法来缓解疫苗接种犹豫并提高疫苗接种率。推导理论已在多个健康领域取得了有效成果。然而,涉及推导理论的干预措施在提高 COVID-19 疫苗接种率方面的效果仍不明确:我们检索了 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Scopus 上 2022 年 12 月 31 日之前发表的随机对照试验,以确定涉及推导理论的干预措施是否能改善 COVID-19 疫苗接种行为和意向。风险比 (RR) 和 95% 置信区间 (CI) 被用作评估疫苗接种行为的综合指标。结果:共纳入 16 项随机对照试验,涉及 176 125 名参与者。涉及推力理论的干预措施微弱地提高了 COVID-19 疫苗的接种率(RR = 1.21,95% CI [1.07,1.36],p < .01)。分组分析表明,社会规范(RR = 2.04,95% CI [1.61,2.57])、默认(RR = 1.32,95% CI [1.03,1.69])和显著提醒(RR = 1.19,95% CI [1.04,1.36])的积极作用较弱。在提高疫苗接种率方面,整合了多种成分的劝导干预比单独使用劝导干预更有效。随着时间的推移,劝导干预的效果逐渐减弱(p < .001)。大多数涉及疫苗接种意向结果的研究(11 项中的 10 项)都显示出积极或部分积极的结果:结论:涉及推导理论的干预措施可促进 COVID-19 疫苗接种行为和意向。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology
Health Psychology 医学-心理学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
170
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Psychology publishes articles on psychological, biobehavioral, social, and environmental factors in physical health and medical illness, and other issues in health psychology.
期刊最新文献
Anxiety, depression, and fear of cancer recurrence in head and neck cancer. Black men's health-related quality of life: A qualitative study to understand community-identified perception and needs. Interventions involving nudge theory for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Training physicians in motivational communication: An integrated knowledge transfer study protocol. Dyadic coping, resilience, and posttraumatic growth in spinal cord injury patients and their spouses: An actor-partner interdependence mediation model analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1